Accent Housing Limited (202517992)

Background

1. The resident complained to the landlord in July 2025. She wanted compensation for damage to her fridge freezer caused by the landlord’s contractors, and a lost kitchen curtain. The resident has vulnerabilities the landlord is aware of.

What the complaint is about

2. The complaint is about the landlord’s response to the resident’s reports of damaged and lost belongings.

Our decision (determination)

3. There was maladministration in the landlord’s response to the resident’s reports of damaged and lost belongings.

We have made orders for the landlord to put things right.

Reasons

4. The landlord’s complaints and compensation policy encourages residents to have home contents insurance to cover loss or damage to personal belongings. It says the landlord will consider complaints about damage to residents’ personal property where this resulted from something it did or failed to do.
5. The policy says the landlord generally will not consider compensation where the resident cannot provide receipts or other evidence for the loss claimed. However, it also says that where there are vulnerabilities it can consider compensation requests on a case-by-case basis, and that it will take an empathetic and flexible approach.
6. Landlords are responsible for the actions of contractors acting on their behalf. The landlord did not dispute that its contractor damaged the resident’s fridge freezer, which left it unusable. It was therefore unreasonable that the landlord, in its complaint responses, suggested the resident claim on her home contents insurance. This approach was not in line with its policy. It was also unreasonable that the landlord expected the resident to seek redress directly from the contractor. The landlord also failed to provide the resident details of its public liability insurance, which would have been reasonable in the circumstances.
7. The resident told the landlord she could not provide proof of purchase for the fridge freezer because she had bought it more than 3 years earlier. The landlord acknowledged the resident’s vulnerabilities in its stage 2 complaint response but said it could not consider the compensation request without evidence. In taking this approach the landlord failed to have sufficient regard for the resident’s vulnerabilities. It missed an opportunity to take a flexible approach and consider the resident’s request on a case-by-case basis in line with its policy, which would have been reasonable in the circumstances. For example, it could have considered the current purchase price of comparable new fridge freezers and the price of second-hand appliances of a similar age. This was a failing.
8. The landlord did not dispute that the resident’s kitchen curtain was lost when the kitchen was cleared to allow for improvement works, and it offered her £25 for this. The resident described the curtain as several years old, but she felt the £25 offered was not sufficient. The landlord missed an opportunity to provide the resident with its insurance details so that she could pursue a claim for the lost curtain, which would have been reasonable in the circumstances.
9. The landlord’s failure to act in line with its policy amounts to maladministration. It is ordered to apologise to and pay the resident £150 compensation for the avoidable distress, inconvenience, time and trouble she experienced in having to pursue her complaint. The landlord is also ordered to assist the resident to obtain proportionate compensation for the damaged fridge freezer and the lost kitchen curtain.

Putting things right

Where we find service failure, maladministration or severe maladministration we can make orders for the landlord to put things right. We have the discretion to make recommendations in all other cases within our jurisdiction.

Orders

Landlords must comply with our orders in the manner and timescales we specify. The landlord must provide documentary evidence of compliance with our orders by the due date set.